← Library
Bombay High CourtABA/2273/2022rejected

Ramakant Revansiddha Balshankar v. The State Of Maharashtra

2022-09-14Hon'Ble Shri Justice Nitin W. Sambre2 pages

(20)-ABA-2273-22.doc.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Digitally signed by BALAJI GOVINDRAO PANCHAL Date:

2022.09.17 10:31:54 +0530 BALAJI GOVINDRAO PANCHAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2273 OF 2022 Shri. Ramakant Revansiddha Balshankar ..Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Mr. Vijay Killedar, for the Applicant.

Mr. A. A. Palkar, APP for the Respondent/State. CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

DATE : 14th SEPTEMBER, 2022 P.C.

1.

Applicant is seeking pre-arrest bail in Crime No.284 of 2022 registered with Solapur City Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 324, 504, 506 of IPC r/w 4, 27 of Arms Act.

2.

The prosecution story is, the applicant along with co-accused assaulted victim and his accomplish. 3.

The submissions of Mr. Vijay Killedar, counsel appearing for the applicant are, there are three sets of role attributed to the applicant. According to him, it is difocult to appreciate the fact that the applicant has conducted himself in the commission of the offence as has been alleged in the FIR.

BGP.

(20)-ABA-2273-22.doc.

4.

He would urge that it is only out of the differences between the complainant and the applicant, applicant is falsely implicated in the crime. 5.

Learned APP would oppose the prayer based on the investigation papers.

6.

I have appreciated the aforesaid submissions. 7.

Perusal of the FIR depicts that specific overt act is attributed to the applicant in commission of the crime which speaks of his active involvement. Amongst other, the role attributed to the applicant is use of weapon i.e. sword. Statement of eye witnesses specifically implicates applicant in the offence in question.

8.

In view of above, there is enough evidence to infer that the applicant is involved in serious offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC.

Necessary ingredients can inferred from the available material. That being so, no case for bail is made out.

9.

The application as such stands rejected.

[NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.] BGP.